Category talk:Associate Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court
Also, this could stand an OTL/ATL split. Turtle Fan 13:56, 18 August 2009 (UTC) TR, is it possible/worthwhile to give the Chiefs their own category? Or OTL/ATL categories? I count two OTL CJotUS, two ATL CJotUS, and one CJotCS. But you're the one who went to law school so maybe you're noticing someone I missed. :I'm making the same count. :We could create the categories, but I don't see anything on the horizon for growth. I don't see TWTPE presenting us with any. Supervolcano might, of course, but that's two years away. TR 16:50, June 29, 2010 (UTC) ::If only the impeachment proceedings in "News from the Front" had reached the point where Harlan Stone would have made an appearance to preside over the trial. (Or would he recuse himself, given the conflict that Roosevelt had given him his job, like Rehnquist did in United States v Nixon? (Of course, Burger, Blackmun, and Powell felt no such compunction.) ::Or if in MwIH some Truman-hater had said "Fuck! Now Stone's dead and Hairy-Ass gets to appoint the Chief Justice!" Maybe Vinson could rule against MAMG in some legal case and Diana would bitch about how absurd it was that Truman's man got to judge her. Vinson would fit into a lot of our categories. Or maybe HT could have given us someone other than Vinson for the sake of a third ATL. Or Moffat could have met a justice and wondered why he even bothered with a court anymore. Or John Jay could have shown up in T2G. Or Salmon Chase could have appeared in a Civil War meeting (probably the most likely of the above). Or maybe the great Sonnye Bonoe could have been on the way to his confirmation hearing in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee and been tragically killed because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Or. . . . ::Seriously, though, I would propose making the category anyway. It's only two in each category but these ATL/OTL split categories have become something of a complementary pair of semi-categories thanks to what we're doing with the catch-all for supercategorization purposes. I really do think we should go for it. Growth potential is slim but not non-existent. All we need to hear is, say, FDR getting either reelected or voted out in W&E (more likely The Big Switch, actually) and someone listening to his inauguration over the radio. Even if the Chief Justice wasn't mentioned by name, just by office, we'd have another article. (Actually, we'd have Charles Evan Hughes, the Bearded Iceberg himself. That would be at least moderately awesome.) Turtle Fan 01:18, June 30, 2010 (UTC) It would also be nice to get the Confederates out and bring a specifically US category up to snuff with the other political offices. And a Confederate category as well, but I think we'd only have one entry, McReynolds, who would also remain in the US category. Maybe we could do like we did with Speakers, where I just left a little note that Bocock was the only Rebel Speaker we have. Turtle Fan 08:15, June 29, 2010 (UTC) :That would probably be a good compromise. TR 16:50, June 29, 2010 (UTC) Change of Title Any objection to changing the name of this category to "Associate Justices of the United States Supreme Court"? TR (talk) 18:32, June 4, 2018 (UTC) :I don't object. I assume you would change the cat for "Chief Justice" to "Judges" in general rather than leave it as a sub-cat of this cat? ML4E (talk) 19:37, June 4, 2018 (UTC) ::Probably. Or just make a catch-all "SCOTUS" category. I think we can more or less justify that. We have the SCOTUS page, and the Supreme Court Four (Joe Steele). ::One of those options. TR (talk) 20:13, June 4, 2018 (UTC) Double cat w Judges A little bit redundant, no?JonathanMarkoff (talk) 07:30, June 28, 2018 (UTC) :Did you read the above conversation? TR (talk) 14:50, June 28, 2018 (UTC) ::The above doesn't have anything addressing the issue that pointing out that a SCOTUS justice was also a judge is a bit redundant.JonathanMarkoff (talk) 19:27, June 28, 2018 (UTC) :::The position is a type of judge. It's not a redundancy, it's a specificity. TR (talk) 19:29, June 28, 2018 (UTC) ::::Elena Kagan was never a judge. Neither was Harriet Miers, but of course she never made it to the Supreme Court. I'm sure there were others with no judicial experience. Turtle Fan (talk) 21:04, June 29, 2018 (UTC) :::::Is that directed at me or Jonathan? TR (talk) 00:09, June 30, 2018 (UTC) ::::::Just in general. Turtle Fan (talk) 04:37, June 30, 2018 (UTC) ::::::Ok. That does remind me that Prescott Bush is in the Chief Judge cat thanks to JS. He wasn't even a lawyer before becoming CJUS. let alone a judge, so no, it's not redundant to have the Supreme Court Justices a subcat of judge. TR (talk) 04:49, June 30, 2018 (UTC)